Byzantine and Modern Greek Perceptions of the Crusades

  • Eleni Sakellariou
Part of the Palgrave Advances book series (PAD)


Imperial ideology had a great impact on the perception of the crusading movement by the Byzantines. Political theory in Byzantium had a strong theological dimension: God wished Christ’s believers to live in one state, ruled by the Roman (Byzantine) emperor. The spiritual significance that was attached to the emperor, the empire and its capital city, had a decisive influence on Byzantine foreign policy. Its principal concerns were twofold: the security of the empire and its capital; and recognition of the emperor’s claim to be the supreme overlord of the Christian world and the empire’s claim to be the unique state endorsed by God. This imperial ideology was consolidated in the late tenth and early eleventh century, when the Byzantine state reached the peak of its territorial expansion and material wealth.1


Twelfth Century Eleventh Century Political Advantage Christian World Byzantine Empire 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Constantine Porphyrogenitos, De administrando imperio, ed. G. Moravcsik, trans. R. J. H. Jenkins (Washington, DC, 1967); D. Obolensky, The Byzantine Commonwealth. Eastern Europe, 500–1453 (London, 1971); H. Ahrweiler, Lideologie politique de lempire byzantin (Paris, 1975); J. Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades (London, 2003), pp. 12–23.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E. M. C. Van Houts, ‘Normandy and Byzantium in the Eleventh Century’, Byzantion, 55 (1985), 544–59; J. Shepard, ‘The Uses of the Franks in EleventhCentury Byzantium’, Anglo-Norman Studies, 15 (1993), 287–90, 302–5; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 35–8, 41–6.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahrweiler, Idéologie, ch. 5.1; H. E. J. Cowdrey, ‘The Gregorian Papacy, Byzantium, and the First Crusade’, ByzantinischeForschungen, 13 (1988), 156–7; J. Shepard, ‘Aspects of Byzantine Attitudes and Policy Towards the West in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries’, Byzantinische Forschungen, 13 (1988), 96–7, 101–2; Shepard, ‘Uses of the Franks’, 277.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Alexiad ofAnna Comnena, trans. E. R. A. Sewter (Harmondsworth, 1969), p. 173; Shepard, ‘Uses of the Franks’, 303.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alexiad, pp. 252, 256; Ekkehard of Aura, in: Frutolfs und Ekkehards Chroniken und die Anonyme Kaiserchronik, ed. F. J. Schmale and I. Schmale-Ott (Darmstadt, 1972), p. 136; Frutolf, in Frutolfs und Ekkehards Chroniken, p. 106; Shepard, ‘Aspects of Byzantine Attitudes’, 102–7; M. de Waha, ‘La lettre d’Alexis I Comnene a Robert I le Frison’, Byzantion, 47 (1977), 113–25; W. Holtzmann, ‘Die Unionsverhandlungen zwischen Kaiser Alexios I. und Papst Urban II. im Jahre 1089’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 28 (1928), 38–67; S. Runciman, A History of the Crusades, vol. 1 (Harmondsworth, 1965), pp. 102–3; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 37, 47.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ekkehard of Aura, p. 136; Bernold of St Blaise, in: Bernoldi Chronicon, Monumenta Germaniae Historica [hereafter cited as MGH], Scriptores, 5, ed. G. H. Pertz (Hanover, 1844), p. 462; for diverging interpretations of the embassy, see Shepard, ‘Aspects of Byzantine Attitudes’, 109–15; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 47–51; Runciman, Crusades, vol. 1, pp. 104–5.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alexiad, pp. 301, 308; Shepard, ‘Aspects of Byzantine Attitudes’, 96–7, 101–3, 115–16; R. J. Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States 1096–1204, trans. J. C. Morris and J. E. Riding (Oxford, 1988), pp. 1–3; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 53–5.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Alexiad, pp. 311, 313, 319–20; Gesta Francorum et aliorum Hierosolimitanorum, ed. R. Hill (Edinburgh, 1962), p. 8; Raymond d’Aguilers, Historia Francorum qui Ceperunt Iherusalem, trans. J. H. Hill and L. H. Hill (Philadelphia, 1968), p. 21; J. Chrysostomides, ‘Byzantine Concepts of War and Peace’, in War, Peace and World Orders in European History, ed. A. V. Hartmann and B. Heuser (London and New York, 2001), pp. 91–101; G. T. Dennis, ‘Defenders of the Christian People: Holy War in Byzantium’, in The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World, ed. A. E. Laiou and R. P. Mottahedeh (Washington, DC, 2001), pp. 31–9; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 5–6, 51–3; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 56, 60, 102.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fulcher of Chartres, The First Crusade. The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres and Other Source Materials, ed. E. Peters, 2nd edn (Philadelphia, 1998), p. 62.Google Scholar
  10. 11.
    Runciman, Crusades, vol. 1, pp. 127–33, 142–71; J. Shepard, ‘When Greek Meets Greek: Alexius Comnenus and Bohemond in 1097–98’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 12 (1988), 186–8, 201–5, 207–8, 214–15; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 3–15; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, 57–9.Google Scholar
  11. 12.
    Alexiad, pp. 89, 315, 323, 424–5; Fulcher of Chartres, p. 62; Gesta Francorum, p. 12; Epistulae et chartae ad historiam primi belli sacri spectantes: Die Kreuzzugsbriefe aus den Jahren 1088–1100, ed. H. Hagenmeyer (Innsbruck, 1901), pp. 138, 154; Raymond d’Aguilers, Historium Francorum, pp. 18–19; Albert of Aachen, Alberti Aquensis Historia Hierosolymitana, in Recueil des historiens des croisades, ed. Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (Paris, 1841–1906), Historiens Occidentaux, vol. 4, p. 305; William of Tyre, A History of the Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, trans. E. A. Babcock and A. C. Krey, vol. 1 (New York, 1943), pp. 326–8; J. L. La Monte, ‘To What Extent Was the Byzantine Empire the Suzerain of the Latin Crusading States?’, Byzantion, 7 (1932), 253–64; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 6–9, 18–27, 53–68; Shepard, ‘When Greek Meets Greek’, 204, 214–15, 227–41; Shepard, “‘Father” or “Scorpion”? Style and Substance in Alexios’s Diplomacy’, in Alexios I Komnenos, ed. M. Mullett and D. Smythe (Belfast, 1996), pp. 105–13; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 23–5, 28, 58, 74–80; Ahrweiler, Lideologie, chs 3.2, 4.3.Google Scholar
  12. 13.
    William of Tyre, History of the Deeds, vol. 2, pp. 83–5, 92–102, 123–30; John Kinnamos, Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus, trans. C. M. Brand (New York, 1976), pp. 22–31; N. Choniates, 0 City of Byzantium, Annals of Niketas Choniates, trans. H. Magoulias (Detroit, 1984), pp. 17–24, 30–1, esp. p. 22; Michel Italikos, lettres etdiscours, ed. P. Gautier (Paris, 1972), pp. 239–70. Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 68–70, 112, 138–9.Google Scholar
  13. 14.
    John II’s Syrian policy as an effort to have imperial supremacy acknowledged in Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 80–92; as an effort to establish territorial control over Antioch, restrained by concerns about its impact on relations with the West, Lilie, Byzantium and the CrusaderStates, pp. 99,109–41. For an early upsurge of anti-Byzantine propaganda in the West, see J. G. Rowe, ‘Paschal II, Bohemund of Antioch and the Byzantine Empire’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, 49 (1966–67), 165–202.Google Scholar
  14. 16.
    For relations during the crusade, see Kinnamos, Deeds, pp. 58–72; Choniates, Annals, pp. 35–42; Odo of Deuil, De Profectione Ludovici VII in Orientem, ed. V. G. Berry (New York, 1948), pp. 24–9, 40–5, 47–9, 54–61, 66–73, 76–9, 83, 109–13; Recueil des Historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. L. Delisle, vol. 15 (Paris, 1878), p. 440, vol. 16 pp. 9–10 (letters of Manuel to Louis VII); H. E. Mayer, The Crusades, trans. J. Gillingham, 2nd edn (Oxford, 1988), pp. 93–106; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 145–63; P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 1143–1180 (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 46–61; Harris, Byzantium and the Cmsades, 94–101; J. P. Niederkom, ‘Die Bundnisverhandlungen Konig Konrads III. mit Johannes II. Komnenos’, Jahrbuch der osterreichischen Byzantinistik, 51 (2001),189–98.Google Scholar
  15. 20.
    Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 179–81, 188–93, 204–11, 220–1; J. Phillips, Defenders of the Holy Land. Relations Between the Latin East and the West, 1119–1187 (Oxford, 1996), pp. 100–26, 132–8, 158–9, 211–13.Google Scholar
  16. 21.
    A. Dondaine, ‘Hugues Etherien et le concile de Constantinople de 1166’, Historisches Jahrbuch, 77 (1958), 473–83; J. Darrouzes, ‘Les documents byzantins du XIIe siecle sur la primauté romaine’, Revue des Etudes Byzantines, 23 (1965), 69–82; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 163–221; Magdalino, Manuel I, pp. 53–76, 83–108; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 101–10.Google Scholar
  17. 22.
    See L. Jones and H. Maguire, ‘A Description of the Jousts of Manuel I Komnenos’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 26 (2002), 104–48.Google Scholar
  18. 24.
    A. F. Stone, ‘The Oration by Eustathios of Thessaloniki for Agnes of France: A Snapshot of Political Tension between Byzantium and the West’, Byzantion, 73 (2003), 112–26.Google Scholar
  19. 25.
    Choniates, Annals, pp. 220–8; Ansbert, ‘Historia de expeditione Friderici imperatoris’, in Quellen zur Geschichte des Kreuzzugs Kaiser Friedrichs 1, ed. A. Chroust, MGH, Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum nova series, vol. 5 (Berlin, 1928), pp. 26–72; ‘Historia Peregrinorum’, in ibid., pp. 131–53; Chronicle of the Third Crusade, trans. H. Nicholson (Aldershot, 1997), pp. 56–8; Runciman, Crusades, vol. 3, pp. 12–15; Mayer, Crusades, pp. 137–51.Google Scholar
  20. 26.
    For diverging opinions about the alliance between Isaac II and Saladin, see C. M. Brand, ‘The Byzantines and Saladin, 1185–1192: Opponents of the Third Crusade’, Speculum, 37 (1962), 167–81; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 230–42; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 128–36.Google Scholar
  21. 27.
    Kinnamos, Deeds, pp. 210–14 (with reference to the expulsion of 1171); Eustathios of Thessaloniki, The Capture of Thessaloniki, ed. and trans. J. R. Melville Rose (Canberra, 1988), pp. 32–7; see also Choniates, Annals, pp. 140–1.Google Scholar
  22. 29.
    Choniates, Annals, pp. 221–2; Ansbert, ‘Historia’, pp. 49–50; Magnus of Reichersberg, Chronicon, MGH, Scriptores, vol. 17, ed. W. Wattenbach (Hanover, 1861), p. 509.Google Scholar
  23. 32.
    Ibid., pp. 210, 228–9; C. Asdracha, ‘L’image de l’homme occidental a Byzance: le témoignage de Kinnamos et de Choniates’, Byzantinislavica, 44 (1983), 31–41; Kazhdan, ‘Latins and Franks in Byzantium’, pp. 88–9; Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, pp. 280–4; S. Rakova, ‘Eastern and Western Man in Nicetas Choniates’, Etudes Balkaniques, 29.4 (1993), 55–63; O. J. Schmitt, ‘Das Normannenbild im Geschichtswerk des Niketas Choniates’, JOB, 47 (1997), 157–77; J. Harris, ‘Distortion, Divine Providence and Genre in Nicetas Choniates’s Account of the Collapse of Byzantium 1180–1204’, Journal of Medieval History, 26 (2000), 19–31.Google Scholar
  24. 33.
    D. E. Queller and S. J. Stratton, ‘A Century of Controversy on the Fourth Crusade’, Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, 6 (1969), 233–77; C. M. Brand, ‘The Fourth Crusade: Some Recent Interpretations’, Mediaevalia et Humanistica, 12 (1984), 33–45; Mayer, Crusades, pp. 201–3; D. E. Queller and T. F. Madden, The Fourth Crusade. The Conquest of Constantinople, 2nd edn (Philadelphia, 1997), pp. 299–313, 318–24.Google Scholar
  25. 34.
    Geoffrey of Villehardouin, La conquete de Constantinople, ed. and trans. E. Faral, 2 vols, 2nd edn (Paris, 1961).Google Scholar
  26. 35.
    Venetian responsibility in Choniates, Annals, p. 295; Runciman, Crusades, vol. 3, pp. 107–31; D. M. Nicol, Byzantium and Venice. A Study in Diplomatic and Cultural Relations (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 124–47.Google Scholar
  27. 36.
    W. Norden, Der vierte Kreuzzug in Rahmen der Beziehungen des Abendlands zu Byzanz (Berlin, 1898).Google Scholar
  28. 37.
    S. Kindlimann, Die Eroberung von Konstantinopel als politische Forderung des Westens im Hochrnittelalter (Zurich, 1969); C. M. Brand, Byzantium Confronts the West 1180–1204 (Cambridge, Mass., 1968); Queller and Madden, The Fourth Crusade; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades. Google Scholar
  29. 38.
    A. Harvey, Economic Expansion in the Byzantine Empire 900–1200 (Cambridge, 1989); N. Oikonomides, Fiscalité et exemption fiscale a Byzance (IXe-XIe s.) (Athens, 1996); N. Oikonomides, ‘La decomposition de l’empire byzantin a la veille de 1204 et les origines de l’empire de Nicée: a propos de la Partitio Romaniae’, in XVe Congres international d’études byzantines. Rapports et corapports, vol. 1.1 (Athens, 1976), 3–28; J. C. Cheynet, Pouvoir et contestation a Byzance (963–1210) (Paris, 1990); M. Angold, ‘The Road to 1204: The Byzantine Background to the Fourth Crusade’, Journal of Medieval History, 25 (1999), 257–78.Google Scholar
  30. 41.
    D. M. Nicol, TheLastCenturies ofByzantium 1261–1453, 2nd edn (Cambridge, 1993), pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
  31. 42.
    Choniates, Annals, p. 314; Devastatio Constantinopolitana, in Chroniques Gréco-Romanes inédites ou peu connues, ed. C. Hopf (Berlin, 1873), p. 92; Villehardouin, La conquete, vol. 2, p. 51; Queller and Madden, The Fourth Crusade, pp. 191–2.Google Scholar
  32. 43.
    Nicol, LastCenturies, pp. 16–18; Harris, Byzantium and the Crusades, pp. 163–71; see also L. Maurommates, ‘Pwµatixl Tautiotrltia, EXA,r)uixfj Tauiotirlia (IIIE’ at.)’ (‘Roman Identity, Greek Identity (13th-15th Centuries)’), Symmeikta, 7 (1987), 186–7.Google Scholar
  33. 45.
    A. E. Laiou, Constantinople and the Latins. The Foreign Policy of Andronicus H 1282–1328 (Cambridge, Mass., 1972), pp. 2–3, 43–4, 202, 252; S. Schein, Fideles Crucis. Tke Papacy, the West, and the Recovery of the Holy Land 1274–1314 (Oxford, 1991), pp. 42–3; P. Lock, ‘The Latin Emperors as Heirs to Byzantium’, in New Constantines, ed. P. Magdalino (Aldershot, 1994), p. 301.Google Scholar
  34. 46.
    Les Registres de ClementlV, ed. E. Jordan, vol. 1 (Paris, 1893), pp. 404, 406; Acta Urbani IV, Clementis IV, Gregorii X (1261–1276), ed. A. Tautu (Rome, 1953), pp. 71–3; S. Borsari, ‘La politica bizantina di Carlo I d’AngiO dal 1266 al 1271’, Archivio Storico per le Province Napoletane, 35 (1956), 327–8; D. J. Geanakoplos, Emperor Michael VIII Palaeologus and the West 1258–1282. A Study in ByzantiuneLatin Relations (Cambridge, Mass., 1959), pp. 204–5.Google Scholar
  35. 47.
    George Pachymeres, Relations Historiques, ed. A. Failler, Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae, 2 vols (Paris, 1984), v, 8–12, 18–19, 23; vi, 24, 32; vol. 2, pp. 461–83, 495–501, 511–13, 611–21; Nikephoros Gregoras, Byzantina Historia, ed. L. Schopen, Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae, 3 vols (Bonn, 1829–55), v, 6: vol. 1, p. 146; M. Sanudo Torsello, Istoria del Regno di Romania, in Chroniques, ed. Hopf, pp. 129–31.Google Scholar
  36. 48.
    For the relations of Michael VIII with the papacy and the West, see Geanakoplos, Emperor Michael VIII. For the Council of Lyons, see Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, ed. J. D. Mansi, vol. 24 (Venice, 1780), cols 61–8; C. Hefele, Histoire des Conciles, ed. H. Leclercq, vol. 6.1 (Paris, 1914), pp. 173–8; V. Laurent and J. Darrouzes, Dossiergrec de lUnion de Lyons (Paris, 1976); Schein, Fideles Crucis, pp. 58–62; Nicol, Last Centuries, pp. 78–9.Google Scholar
  37. 50.
    Ibid., pp. 195–7, 249, 288, 298–329; Schein, Fideles Crucis, pp. 206–11; N. Housley, The Later Crusades, 1274–1580. From Lyons to Alcazar (Oxford, 1992), pp. 29–31.Google Scholar
  38. 51.
    K. M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571), vol. 1 (Philadelphia, 1976), pp. 163–223, 285–404; vol. 2 (Philadelphia, 1978), pp. 54–107; Housley, The Later Crusades, pp. 49–150; Nicol, Last Centuries, pp. 172–368.Google Scholar
  39. 53.
    D. M. Nicol, ‘The Byzantine View of Western Europe’, Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 8 (1967), 331–9; G. Dagron, ‘Orthodoxie byzantine et culture hellénique autour de 1453’, Mélanges de lEcole Franfaise de Rome, Moyen Age, 113 (2001), 767–91; J. Gill, ‘The Divine East-Roman Empire’, in Greece: The Legacy. Essays on the History of Greece, Ancient, Byzantiune, and Modem, ed. J. A. Koumoulides (Maryland, 1998), pp. 69–70; E. Zachariadou, H cTTExTaari iwv OOwµavwv 6TTjv Eupwrrri cos iriv a,k,wari iiS Kcovaiavtiivour<aswS (1354–1453)’ (‘The Ottoman Expansion in Europe to the Fall of Constantinople (1354–1435)’), in IQaopia rou E.i.%.rlvucotiEOvoug (History of the Greek Nation), vol. 9 (Athens, 1980), pp. 207–9.Google Scholar
  40. 54.
    K. Paparregopoulos, IQropia rou EA.(rlvtxou EBvons (History of the Greek Nation), 2nd edn, vol. 4 (Athens, 1887), pp. 424–27, 448–506, 526–651; vol. 5 (Athens, 1887), pp. 42–377, 619–44. D. M. Nicol, ‘Greece and Byzantium’, in Greece: The Legacy, ed. Koumoulides, pp. 86–7.Google Scholar
  41. 55.
    Compare A. E. Vakalopoulos, IQZopia zou Neoo Earlvio ,uoo (A History of the Modern Greek Nation), vols 1, 3 (Thessaloniki, 1961, 1968); A. Christophilopoulou, BuCava[vr/IQaopia, T’, 1081–1204 (Byzantine History, volume 3, 1081–1204) (Athens, 2001), pp. 10, 21, 52, 58–63, 129–30, 215–26, and B. G. Spiridonakis, Grecs, Occidentaux et Turcs de 1054 a 1453 (Thessaloniki, 1990), pp. 69–138, to the chapters by A. E. Laiou, N. Oikonomides and E. Zachariadou in IQZopiaToo E.I.lrlvexou EBvous (History of the Greek Nation), vol. 9 (Athens, 1980); N. Oikonomides, ‘Byzantium Between East and West (XIII-XVi centuries)’, Byzantinische Forschungen, 13 (1988), 319–32; ‘Oyiets zrls Iaiopias toy Beveioxpazotiµsvoo E.1,4vtQ,uo6 (Aspects of the History of Hellenism under Venetian Rule), ed. C. A. Maltezou (Athens, 1993). For a criticism of the traditional view of the Venetian colonies in Romania as entities consisting of fundamentally antagonistic ‘ethnic’ groups, see S. McKee, Uncommon Dominion. Venetian Crete and the Myth of Ethnic Purity (Philadelphia, 2000), pp. 168–77.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eleni Sakellariou

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations